Holder warns against anti-Muslim “backlash”

Of course people, this is only in the minds of the liberal buttholes in the buck ofama regime. They have to invent ways to convince their muslim brothers that they are really taking care of them and the hell with the USA.

Of course there should be no “backlash.” No innocent people should be victimized for the deeds of someone else, and any such act is reprehensible. There are two questions here:

1) Is Holder aware of, or even interested in, the fact that Islamic supremacist pressure groups with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), exaggerate “backlash” fears beyond all proportion in order to deflect attention away from both the jihad attack at hand and the failure of Islamic groups in America to do anything to prevent such attacks?

2) Will Holder issue a similar warning to the Muslim community in the U.S., calling on them to clean up their act and fight against jihad terror activity sincerely, in both word and deed?

I expect that the answer to both is no.

“Breathing fire at the hypocrites,” by Michael Goodwin in the New York Post, May 1:

It is a sad sight to watch a man grapple with a world that fails to meet his expectations. Unless that man is Eric Holder. Then it is simply infuriating.The attorney general, warped by his own prejudice, is confused because his fellow citizens are better people than he imagines.

Holder sees white bigots around every corner, and can’t handle the truth that very few Americans actually hate Muslims. So, like Elmer Fudd hunting “wascally wabbits,” Holder’s shots usually backfire.

His Monday speech to the Anti-Defamation League was a classic case of twisted thinking. With his FBI fumbling a chance to stop the Boston bombers, he bizarrely stressed his determination to punish anyone who discriminates against Muslims.

Of course, he didn’t admit that the bombers were Islamists. That would violate the Obama administration’s omerta on linking Islam to terrorism.

But the “see no evil” approach creates a dilemma. How do you warn against vigilante attacks on Muslims without admitting that Muslims did the bombing?

By being disingenuous, as Holder was, saying: “I also want to make clear that — just as we will pursue relentlessly anyone who would target our people or attempt to terrorize our cities — the Justice Department is firmly committed to protecting innocent people against misguided acts of retaliation.”

There haven’t been any attacks reported, nor have there been many since 9/11. Indeed, Holder, trying to make it sound like an avalanche, said Justice investigated “more than 800 incidents involving threats, assaults and acts of vandalism and violence targeting Muslims, Arabs, Sikhs, South Asians and others.”

Think about that — 800 investigations in nearly 12 years, or about 70 a year, in a country of 320 million people. Notice he didn’t say how many led to findings of guilt.

Inadvertently, Holder further undermined his argument with another number. He said there were “more than 1,000 documented incidents” of anti-Semitism in 2011 alone.

Clearly, Jews, not Muslims, bear a greater burden of religious bigotry. But Jews don’t bomb marathons, so who is worried about protecting them? Not Eric Holder.

Two of my SEAL brothers ([Glen] Doherty and [Ty] Woods) were in Benghazi, working with the CIA on an intelligence mission to locate shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles that were stolen by Al Qaeda when Libya fell. They heard several shots being fired near the consulate. It was recorded that Ty radioed to inform his superiors and tell them what he was hearing and requested permission to assist at the consulate. However, they were told to “stand down!” An hour later, they called again to report the gunfire and requested to assist and were again told to “stand down!” WHY? And by whom? Only the President can give the order to military units to cross a country’s borders.

On or about midnight, while shooting in various areas was still going on, it was reported that Woods and Doherty called for any U.S. military support they could get because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house/annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound (which was verified by the radio recordings and by the drone that was flying overhead.) The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. …

It was reported that both Woods and Doherty were killing every terrorist that appeared. Ty repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship that was in a neutral area. This is a C-130 aircraft that fires 20mm bullets (about the size of a man’s thumb) and 105 howitzer rounds at laser-illuminated targets. This aircraft is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The aircraft was told to “stand down”! WHY?

Here’s why: Permission to provide support was not granted by the left-wing community organizer the liberal media saw fit to make President of the United States. Instead, he went to bed to rest up for his fundraiser the next day in Las Vegas.

At least one witness has confirmed that support could have been provided:

A military special ops member who watched as the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi unfolded last September told Fox News the U.S. had highly trained forces just a few hours away, and said he and others feel the government betrayed the four men who died in the attack.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, and appearing in a Fox News Channel interview with his face and voice disguised, the special operator contradicted claims by the Obama administration and a State Department review that said there wasn’t enough time for U.S. military forces to have intervened in the Sept. 11 attack in which U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, an embassy employee and two former Navy SEALs working as private security contractors were killed.

“I know for a fact that C-110, the EUCOM CIF, was doing a training exercise in … not in the region of North Africa, but in Europe,” the operator told Fox News’ Adam Housley. “And they had the ability to act and to respond.”

Although full details can only come to light when there has been a thorough investigation and responsible media coverage, it appears obvious that Obama is guilty of extreme dereliction of duty. It is beyond obvious that he is unfit for office.

A Battle of Wits

“Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason.” –Benjamin Franklin

In the 1987 quotable classic film “The Princess Bride,” a favorite scene pits the heroic “Man in Black” against the villain Vizzini in a “battle of wits” to win the damsel in distress. After Vizzini runs rhetorical circles around himself trying to outsmart the hero, the Man in Black wryly remarks, “Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.” Vizzini replies, “Wait till I get going! Now where was I?” Such is the case with ObamaCare. Wait till it gets going!

At least that’s been Barack Obama’s response when asked about implementation problems — that when the law really gets going, everyone will love it. This week, however, he attempted to assuage fears by telling us “a huge chunk of it’s already been implemented.” So no big deal, he says. “Those who can’t afford it, we’re going to provide them with some subsidies. That’s it. I mean, that’s what’s left to implement because the other stuff’s been implemented and it’s working fine.” In spite of all evidence to the contrary, Obama tells us not to worry: “For the 85 percent to 90 percent of Americans who already have health insurance, they’re already experiencing most of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act even if they don’t know it. … They don’t have to worry about anything else.”

But Hoover Institution fellow Daniel Kessler estimates “that there will be 30 million to 40 million people damaged in some fashion by the Affordable Care Act.” Side effects include — but are not limited to — skyrocketing premiums, increased wait times for care, higher taxes and loss of jobs and benefits.

Many of the taxes established by ObamaCare are indeed already in effect, though taxpayers won’t fully feel the pain until they file their 2013 returns. And the individual mandate penalty, er, tax doesn’t begin until 2014, while the so-called “Cadillac” tax on high-cost insurance plans won’t kick in until 2018.

Another part of the law that doesn’t exist yet is the 15-member Independent Payment Advisory Board — the infamous “death panel.” The panel is supposed to receive a report from government officials overseeing Medicaid, but if the panel doesn’t even exist, neither will the oversight. Finding 15 qualified volunteers to stand for such dismal duty — to say nothing of getting them confirmed by the Senate — seems to be nearly impossible, though the law was seemingly designed with that end in mind. If a panel isn’t nominated, Obama won’t have to spend political capital on the fight, while much of its authority will fall by default to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius.

Here’s How to Boost Journalism’s Credibility

During May Day celebrations a couple of days ago, a freelance videographer asked a CBS reporter if she planned to include the people carrying hammer and sickle flags in her report.

First, she denied having seen any, even though there were a few visible just yards behind her. Then, she asked the videographer what those flags meant, what they represent. Seriously.

In Los Angeles this week, the L.A. Times has discovered that it pays to be in politicians’ pockets as several city council members have stepped forward and threatened to intervene should the paper be sold to the — gasp — conservative Koch brothers.

Councilman Bill Rosendahl said he decided to sponsor the motion because he had read (probably in the Times or the Huffington Post) that “the Koch brothers, if it’s true, it’s the end of journalism. I don’t want to see Los Angeles, the second-largest city and the biggest region in the nation, not to have a quality newspaper.”

The end of journalism came and went a while ago, not that Rosendahl could be expected to know that, since he apparently relies on the Times for news.

What a twofer I found for you today. First up, TTAC’s Ed Niedermeyer has a piece in the Wall Street Journal headlined “General Tso’s Motors,” which has got to be the best headline you’ll see all week. But he also tells the story of GM the White House doesn’t want you to know:

GM’s investments aren’t merely about meeting Chinese demand, which has actually slowed in recent years. According to statements to the press made by company officials at the Shanghai Auto Show, GM is targeting 100,000-plus exports of Chinese-made cars this year, a record, with export growth likely to be more than 50%.

Once merely an important growth market, China is fast becoming GM’s global export base, and the change can be seen in the very structure of the company. Before last year, GM’s vice president for global manufacturing was a North American-focused executive based in Detroit. Now the person holding that position is the president of GM’s international operations, overseeing the company’s ventures in China, Korea and Russia.

As the result of the company’s new emphasis, GM China President Bob Socia says that Americans “could very well” soon find Chinese-made GM cars on showroom floors. “There is no reason why we can’t be exporting to the [United] States,” he told a reporter for the website Autoblog at the Shanghai Auto Show.

But GM selling cars made in China at American dealerships probably isn’t what the federal government, in late 2008 under President Bush and then under President Obama, had in mind when it came to GM’s rescue.

How’s that for a great return on your billions of tax dollars? Then again, with Obama’s track record of picking stinker investments, maybe there’s no real surprise here.